New Nissan Survey

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

DaveinOlyWA

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2010
Messages
16,260
Location
Olympia, WA
new survey from Nissan;

Nissan is investigating a Vehicle-to-Home (V2H) bi-directional charger for at home installation. It provides Level 2 charging, where power flows from the home to the LEAF – therefore this charger could serve as your EVSE (home charging dock). It also provides the ability to switch the direction of flow from the LEAF battery pack to the home, where the LEAF battery can provide energy to the home in order to offset peak utility prices or supply power during a disruption. This reverse flow functionality can help reduce monthly utility bills and help reduce the utility’s peak electricity demand.

it also asks about range loss, what was expected, what is acceptable...
 
I'm in the process of answering it now.

It asks what percentage of range reduction you expected before you bought the LEAF, in one year, five and ten years. Then asks what percentage you now expect in each time frame. To me, they should have included each year from one through ten years. Since very few owners have seen capacity reduction inside of one year, but many have seen it by 15 months. I said that I expected and I still expect to see no capacity reduction at one year and 20% at 5 years. But I didn't expect 15% reduction in 15 months, and I had no way to say that in this survey. If they'd asked the question for each year, one through ten, they would have received more accurate feedback from owners about expected capacity reduction.

It also asks about the DTE (Distance to Empty) gauge and whether you prefer one that is accurate at the moment, but goes up and down a lot depending on driving conditions, or whether you'd prefer one that is less accurate but uses driving data over a longer time period and mostly goes downward. I chose the latter. They also asked how much range reduction on the DTE we expect to see within the first five miles of driving. DUH: how about five miles, from an accurate meter?

Then questions about wireless charging, about power outages during wired charging, reasons for choice of LEAF. Unfortunately, there was no opportunity for free text entry of any other concerns that we might have.
 
They email it to you.

I don't really see how they can deliver a realistic DTE gauge function until the range goes way up. Right now the car would have to be able to see into the future to give you an accurate estimate.
 
Haven't gotten the email yet, but I suspect this is how they will offer an "upgrade" for the first gen Leaf to 6.6 kW- by using an external DC charger.

Of course, this means squat when using public j1772, but at least it's bidirectional. I could grab a few kWh from work to bring home to run my apartment. Sounds great! :D

Pictures of the Japanese leaf to home: http://www.flickr.com/photos/nissanev/sets/72157629961041328/

Note, it would require a firmware update to get the CHAdeMO port to V1.0 to support pulling power from the pack.

Interesting that they went with Nichicon, who supposedly does not have the bid for the 6.6 kW internal charger in the '13 Leaf.

Jeremy
 
With the questions regarding the DTE - it left out the most important question - how about simply giving an accurate indication of remaining energy in the pack along with an accurate mi/kWh reading and let us do the math ourself? After all - we probably have a better estimate of what the road will bring than the car does.

A simple kWh reading will suffice (or just copy Tesla and have 2 DTE indicators - one based on ideal miles and one based on recent driving) and I'll do the math myself, thank-you-very-much. Then the only thing needed is a graph of mi/kWh over the past 100 miles. The current history mi/kWh graph is completely useless.

The 3 options of "accurate but quickly changing", "less accurate but doesn't tend to overestimate" and "not accurate at all but never overestimates" are all pretty crappy.
 
Boomer23 said:
It asks what percentage of range reduction you expected before you bought the LEAF, in one year, five and ten years. Then asks what percentage you now expect in each time frame. To me, they should have included each year from one through ten years. Since very few owners have seen capacity reduction inside of one year, but many have seen it by 15 months. I said that I expected and I still expect to see no capacity reduction at one year and 20% at 5 years. But I didn't expect 15% reduction in 15 months, and I had no way to say that in this survey. If they'd asked the question for each year, one through ten, they would have received more accurate feedback from owners about expected capacity reduction.

It also asks about the DTE (Distance to Empty) gauge and whether you prefer one that is accurate at the moment, but goes up and down a lot depending on driving conditions, or whether you'd prefer one that is less accurate but uses driving data over a longer time period and mostly goes downward. I chose the latter. They also asked how much range reduction on the DTE we expect to see within the first five miles of driving. DUH: how about five miles, from an accurate meter?


I answered the same ways. On the capcity loss questions I said a 40% reduction after 10 years, and that was my expectation going in and my expectation now (fingers crossed!).
 
bdgotoh said:
They email it to you.

I don't really see how they can deliver a realistic DTE gauge function until the range goes way up. Right now the car would have to be able to see into the future to give you an accurate estimate.

they could if they allowed the car history to be taken into account when factoring in the "driver quotient"

trivia question; why does Nissan require battery check annually?

answer; because the data logger on LEAF only has enough memory to store a years worth of driving/charging habits
 
DaveinOlyWA said:
answer; because the data logger on LEAF only has enough memory to store a years worth of driving/charging habits
Sorry, but this looks like total BS to me, especially if you examined the seekrit battery report Phil outed a while ago. My best guess is that they need to get this data periodically to stay abreast of fleet-wide developments and trends. The annual service arrangement is just a practical opportunity to get it done.
 
surfingslovak said:
DaveinOlyWA said:
answer; because the data logger on LEAF only has enough memory to store a years worth of driving/charging habits
Sorry, but this looks like total BS to me, especially if you examined the seekrit battery report Phil outed a while ago. My best guess is that they need to get this data periodically to stay abreast of fleet-wide developments and trends. The annual service arrangement is just a practical opportunity to get it done.

IMHO, the Annual Battery Report is done so that dealers get you to bring the car in. Then, they talk you into getting/paying $$$ for a bunch of bogus maintenance.
 
I was disappointed that they didn't have a text entry field at the end. I tried to skip the GOM questions, but the survey didn't allow it. How can I answer questions on the GOM when I pay no attention to it because it gives readings that have no relevance whatsoever to my range and driving? I don't care what it says because it is always wrong in my mountainous area. The GOM is for entertainment purposes only:

By contrast, the fuel bars—although coarse compared to a proper SOC meter—provide a useful indicator of whether or not I can make my destination, based on previous experience.

I also don't like the daily-commuter type questions that want average weekday and weekend mileage. What about those of us who do not have predictable driving itineraries? Those questions would have been better structured as "average miles per week", "most miles in a single day in a typical week", and "most frequent distance in a single day in a typical week". But I guess that makes me an outlier in what was designed as an urban commuter car, not a vehicle for running discretionary errands.

I was glad to get a chance to say that I wasn't interested in inductive charging in my garage. Are people really that put off by plugging-in? No way do I want the wasted electricity, expense, and added complexity of inductive charging: it is a solution in search of a problem. I sure wish someone would drive a stake through the heart of inductive charging and focus on battery capacity, battery life, battery cost, and overall range. Things that matter.

I was interested in the questions on expected battery capacity over time. Can't be a coincidence: it does appear that Nissan is trying gauge expectations now that they know they have a crisis on their hands in very hot climate areas.
 
derkraut said:
surfingslovak said:
DaveinOlyWA said:
answer; because the data logger on LEAF only has enough memory to store a years worth of driving/charging habits
Sorry, but this looks like total BS to me, especially if you examined the seekrit battery report Phil outed a while ago. My best guess is that they need to get this data periodically to stay abreast of fleet-wide developments and trends. The annual service arrangement is just a practical opportunity to get it done.

IMHO, the Annual Battery Report is done so that dealers get you to bring the car in. Then, they talk you into getting/paying $$$ for a bunch of bogus maintenance.
+1 to that. Henry Ford said it best when he stated he would sell the cars for a dollar if his company did all of the repair work.
 
dgpcolorado said:
I was glad to get a chance to say that I wasn't interested in inductive charging in my garage. Are people really that put off by plugging-in? No way do I want the wasted electricity, expense, and added complexity of inductive charging: it is a solution in search of a problem. I sure wish someone would drive a stake through the heart of inductive charging and focus on battery capacity, battery life, battery cost, and overall range. Things that matter.
Agree 100%. Plugging the Leaf in is simply not a problem. Why spend time and money on it? How about:

--Putting in a real SOC meter
--The ability to charge to a set percentage, either on immediate charge or timed charge
--The ability to set a default charge percentage
--A real battery temperature gauge in degrees C. or F.
--Much more specific info on how to properly care for the Leaf battery and an estimate of the magnitude of effect on different charging habits

I was interested in the questions on expected battery capacity over time. Can't be a coincidence: it does appear that Nissan is trying gauge expectations now that they know they have a crisis on their hands in very hot climate areas.
That is definitely encouraging. Hope they send me a survey.
 
Stoaty said:
dgpcolorado said:
I was glad to get a chance to say that I wasn't interested in inductive charging in my garage. Are people really that put off by plugging-in? No way do I want the wasted electricity, expense, and added complexity of inductive charging: it is a solution in search of a problem. I sure wish someone would drive a stake through the heart of inductive charging and focus on battery capacity, battery life, battery cost, and overall range. Things that matter.
Agree 100%. Plugging the Leaf in is simply not a problem. Why spend time and money on it? How about:

--Putting in a real SOC meter
--The ability to charge to a set percentage, either on immediate charge or timed charge
--The ability to set a default charge percentage
--A real battery temperature gauge in degrees C. or F.
--Much more specific info on how to properly care for the Leaf battery and an estimate of the magnitude of effect on different charging habits
Yes!
 
The DTE question always frustrates me. I wish they had had an area for comments.

I've mentioned the following in every research study I've participated in:

My meter will go from over 100 miles when I take a trip downhill towards the coast and on the return trip it changes to 60.
My avg usage is almost always steady at 4.0 to 4.2 m/KwH.
Can someone explain why this number cannot be used to give me a better estimate? Is it really that complex to determine the remaining charge left in the battery or are the engineers so close to the silicon that they can't see the solution? Can someone enlighten me?
 
Stoaty said:
--Putting in a real SOC meter

Why would you want an SOC meter? I would rather have a BCM which will tell me my actual battery capacity. An SOC meter is only good while the battery is new. Once you start to lose capacity, an SOC meter is virtually useless. You could be at a 20% loss of capacity, yet your 'smart' SOC meter could still say 100% SOC after a 100% charge.
 
Stoaty said:
--Putting in a real SOC meter
--The ability to charge to a set percentage, either on immediate charge or timed charge
--The ability to set a default charge percentage
--A real battery temperature gauge in degrees C. or F.
--Much more specific info on how to properly care for the Leaf battery and an estimate of the magnitude of effect on different charging habits

--A setting to override the charge timer if you're away from home (based on the GPS)
 
LEAFfan said:
Why would you want an SOC meter? I would rather have a BCM which will tell me my actual battery capacity.
Both would be good to have.

An SOC meter is only good while the battery is new. Once you start to lose capacity, an SOC meter is virtually useless.
Not if you want to charge/discharge the battery to certain SOC (for optimal life of the battery pack) or store the Leaf at an optimal SOC. This is something I do currently, but don't have actual SOC (although my Gid-meter gives me a relatively close approximation).
 
I haven't seen this in my email in either my main inbox or the spam box. I see I neglected to respond to a survey Nissan sent March 2012, so I hope they didn't drop me from their list.

Boomer23 said:
I'm in the process of answering it now.

It asks what percentage of range reduction you expected before you bought the LEAF, in one year, five and ten years. Then asks what percentage you now expect in each time frame. To me, they should have included each year from one through ten years. Since very few owners have seen capacity reduction inside of one year, but many have seen it by 15 months. I said that I expected and I still expect to see no capacity reduction at one year and 20% at 5 years. But I didn't expect 15% reduction in 15 months, and I had no way to say that in this survey. If they'd asked the question for each year, one through ten, they would have received more accurate feedback from owners about expected capacity reduction.
Do I understand you correctly, that you responded "I expected and I still expect to see no capacity reduction at one year and 20% at 5 years" even though you have strong evidence (from the Gid meter) of some capacity reduction now ? Is this because they phrased the question such that only the loss of a full capacity bar counts as "capacity reduction" ? Perhaps you also don't wish to call attention to the fact that you are using a Gid meter? It would seem Nissan will conclude that they can put you in the fully satisfied, not complaining pile.

I agree wireless charging makes no sense for all the reasons mentioned. V2G is somewhat more interesting to me, but I am not going to do it until I get a battery that has a slower rate of decline.
 
Stoaty said:
An SOC meter is only good while the battery is new. Once you start to lose capacity, an SOC meter is virtually useless.
Not if you want to charge/discharge the battery to certain SOC (for optimal life of the battery pack) or store the Leaf at an optimal SOC. This is something I do currently, but don't have actual SOC (although my Gid-meter gives me a relatively close approximation).
I agree with Stoaty.
My Gid meter is even more important in trip planning now that my capacity is dropping. My latest Gid reading for a "80%" charge was 75.0%. Most of these hot days I stop the charge at 45% to 65% as indicated on the Gid meter. Are there just a few of us doing this? I can't quantify the benefit from doing this. It is not dramatic (I am still losing capacity), but I believe it partially helps mitigate the summer temperature impact.
 
Back
Top